SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “LOGISTICS”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 451 records · Page 25

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1989

SSME component assembly and life management expert system

The space shuttle utilizes several rocket engine systems, all of which must function with a high degree of reliability for successful mission completion. The space shuttle main engine (SSME) is by far the most complex of the rocket engine systems and is designed to be reusable. The reusability of spacecraft systems introduces many problems related to testing, reliability, and logistics. Components must be assembled from parts inventories in a manner which will most effectively utilize the available parts. Assembly must be scheduled to efficiently utilize available assembly benches while still maintaining flight schedules. Assembled components must be assigned to as many contiguous flights as possible, to minimize component changes. Each component must undergo a rigorous testing program prior to flight. In addition, testing and assembly of flight engines and components must be done in conjunction with the assembly and testing of developmental engines and components. The development, testing, manufacture, and flight assignments of the engine fleet involves the satisfaction of many logistical and operational requirements, subject to many constraints. The purpose of the SSME Component Assembly and Life Management Expert System (CALMES) is to assist the engine assembly and scheduling process, and to insure that these activities utilize available resources as efficiently as possible.

Ali, M.↗

NASA NTRS1995

Storage Information Management System (SIMS) Spaceflight Hardware Warehousing at Goddard Space Flight Center

Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) on site and leased warehouses contain thousands of items of ground support equipment (GSE) and flight hardware including spacecraft, scaffolding, computer racks, stands, holding fixtures, test equipment, spares, etc. The control of these warehouses, and the management, accountability, and control of the items within them, is accomplished by the Logistics Management Division. To facilitate this management and tracking effort, the Logistics and Transportation Management Branch, is developing a system to provide warehouse personnel, property owners, and managers with storage and inventory information. This paper will describe that PC-based system and address how it will improve GSFC warehouse and storage management.

Kubicko, Richard M.↗

NASA NTRS1996

STS-79 Mission Highlight Presentation

The flight crew of STS-79, Cmdr. William F. Readdy, Pilot Terrence W. Wilcutt, Mission Specialists, Thomas D. Akers, Shannon Lucid, Jay Apt, and Carl E. Walz can be seen performing pre-launch activities such as eating the traditional breakfast, crew suit-up, and the ride out to the launch pad. Also, included are various panoramic views of the shuttle on the pad. The crew can be seen being readied in the 'white room' for their mission. After the closing of the hatch and arm retraction, launch activities are shown including countdown, engine ignition, launch, and the separation of the Solid Rocket Boosters. STS-79 is the second Shuttle-Mir mission to carry a SPACEHAB module on board, and the first to carry a double module. The forward portion of the double module will house experiments conducted by the crew before, during and after Atlantis is docked to the Russian space station. The aft portion of the double module primarily houses the logistics equipment to be transferred to the Russian space station. Logistics include food, clothing, experiment supplies, and spare equipment for Mir.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1997

Designing for Maintainability and System Availability

The final goal for a delivered system (whether a car, aircraft, avionics box or computer) should be its availability to operate and perform its intended function over its expected design life. Hence, in designing a system, we cannot think in terms of delivering the system and just walking away. The system supplier needs to provide support throughout the operating life of the product. Here, supportability requires an effective combination of reliability, maintainability, logistics and operations engineering (as well as safety engineering) to have a system that is available for its intended use throughout its designated mission lifetime. Maintainability is a key driving element in the effective support and upkeep of the system as well as providing the ability to modify and upgrade the system throughout its lifetime. This paper then, will concentrate on maintainability and its integration into the system engineering and design process. The topics to be covered include elements of maintainability, the total cost of ownership, how system availability, maintenance and logistics costs and spare parts cost effect the overall program costs. System analysis and maintainability will show how maintainability fits into the overall systems approach to project development. Maintainability processes and documents will focus on how maintainability is to be performed and what documents are typically generated for a large scale program. Maintainability analysis shows how trade-offs can be performed for various alternative components. The conclusions summarize the paper and are followed by specific problems for hands-on training.

Lalli, Vincent R.↗

NASA NTRS1999

Outsourcing as an Airline Strategy

Since the deregulation of the airline industry, carriers have searched for any method to improve their competitive position. At the same time, there has been a growth in the use of Third Party Logistics throughout corporate America. This paper presents an overview of the Third Party Logistics system of outsourcing and insourcing within the airline industry. This discussion generated a number of propositions, possible future scenarios and opportunities for empirical testing.

Rutner, Stephen M.↗

NASA NTRS1999

STS-96 Crew Interview: Valery Tokarev

Live footage of a preflight interview with the Russian Cosmonaut Valery Ivanovich Tokarev is presented. The interview addresses many different questions including why Tokarev wanted to be a cosmonaut, and the events that led to his interest. Other interesting information that this one-on-one interview discusses is this logistics and supply mission, and why it is important to send equipment to the International Space Station (ISS) before the astronauts. Tokarev compares both the Russian and United States space programs, and space shuttles. He mentions the logistics and supply mission, plans to transfer the supply, his involvement with the installation of mufflers, and the undocking of Discovery. The future automatic docking of the Service Module to the Zarya Module of the ISS, and the role that the ISS will play in future space flight and exploration are also discussed.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1973

Phase 111A Crew Interface Specifications Development for Inflight Maintenance and Stowage Functions

This report presents the findings and data products developed during the Phase IIIA Crew Interface Specification Study for Inflight Maintenance and Stowage Functions, performed by General Electric for the NASA, Johnson Space Center with a set of documentation that can be used as definitive guidelines to improve the present process of defining, controlling and managing flight crew interface requirements that are related to inflight maintenance (including assembly and servicing) and stowage functions. During the Phase IIIA contract period, the following data products were developed: 1) Projected NASA Crew Procedures/Flight Data File Development Process. 2) Inflight Maintenance Management Process Description. 3) Preliminary Draft, General Specification, Inflight Maintenance Management Requirements. 4) Inflight Maintenance Operational Process Description. 5) Preliminary Draft, General Specification, Inflight Maintenance Task and Support Requirements Analysis. 6) Suggested IFM Data Processing Reports for Logistics Management The above Inflight Maintenance data products have been developed during the Phase IIIA study after review of Space Shuttle Program Documentation, including the Level II Integrated Logistics Requirements and other DOD and NASA data relative to Payloads Accommodations and Satellite On-Orbit Servicing. These Inflight Maintenance data products were developed to be in consonance with Space Shuttle Program technical and management requirements.

Carl, John G.↗

NASA NTRS1999

Outsourcing as an Airline Strategy

Since the deregulation of the airline industry, carriers have searched for any method to improve their competitive position. At the same time, there has been a growth in the use of Third Party Logistics throughout corporate America, This paper presents an overview of the Third Party Logistics system of outsourcing and insourcing within the airline industry. This discussion generated a number of propositions, possible future scenarios and opportunities for empirical testing.

Brown, John H.↗

NASA NTRS2000

Landsat TM as a Tool for Locating Habitat for Cerulean Warblers

I believe that I made significant strides in three areas between fall of 1997 and fall of 2000 when I concluded my participation in the JOVE program. First, I acquired skill in digital remote sensing. This was significant to me because it had been 20 years since I had done any work utilizing remote sensing. I used my new skills in two classroom settings (forest ecology and GIS). In addition, I will participate as an instructor of digital remote sensing in a workshop for secondary educators this coming spring. Second, I received funding from the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission and the U.S. Forest Service to supplement JOVE funds. Third, and most importantly, a students and I developed a technique using LandSAT TM for identifying habitat for cerulean warblers. We developed a habitat model using logistic regression to discriminate between pixels that had a high probability of representing good cerulean warbler habitat and pixels that had a low probability of representing cerulean warbler habitat. Using this model, we located five significant populations of cerulean warblers in the Ozark National Forest of Arkansas. These populations were unknown before the initiation of this research and further represent a significant proportion of the known cerulean warblers in Arkansas. Preliminary findings were presented at the Ornithological Societies of America meeting in August of 1999. I also presented findings at the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission Research Symposium held in June of 2000. Finally, one paper is in press: James, D. A., C.J. Kellner, J. Self, and J. Davis., 'Breeding season distribution of cerulean warblers in Arkansas in the 1990's'. In addition, one paper is under construction: 'Population fluctuation and habitat selection by cerulean warblers in upland forests of Arkansas,' and one paper is under consideration: 'LandSAT TM and Logistic regression for identification of cerulean warbler habitat in upland forests of Arkansas.'

Kellner, Chris↗

NASA NTRS2000

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

The NASA SLR Operational Center is responsible for: 1) NASA SLR network control, sustaining engineering, and logistics; 2) ILRS mission operations; and 3) ILRS and NASA SLR data operations. NASA SLR network control and sustaining engineering tasks include technical support, daily system performance monitoring, system scheduling, operator training, station status reporting, system relocation, logistics and support of the ILRS Networks and Engineering Working Group. These activities ensure the NASA SLR systems are meeting ILRS and NASA mission support requirements. ILRS mission operations tasks include mission planning, mission analysis, mission coordination, development of mission support plans, and support of the ILRS Missions Working Group. These activities ensure than new mission and campaign requirements are coordinated with the ILRS. Global Normal Points (NP) data, NASA SLR FullRate (FR) data, and satellite predictions are managed as part of data operations. Part of this operation includes supporting the ILRS Data Formats and Procedures Working Group. Global NP data operations consist of receipt, format and data integrity verification, archiving and merging. This activity culminates in the daily electronic transmission of NP files to the CDDIS. Currently of all these functions are automated. However, to ensure the timely and accurate flow of data, regular monitoring and maintenance of the operational software systems, computer systems and computer networking are performed. Tracking statistics between the stations and the data centers are compared periodically to eliminate lost data. Future activities in this area include sub-daily (i.e., hourly) NP data management, more stringent data integrity tests, and automatic station notification of format and data integrity issues.

Carter, David↗

NASA NTRS2002

STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape: Flight Days 8 - 10 - Part 3 of 4

An overview of the STS-111 Endeavour mission is given through footage of each flight day. Scenes from flight days 8 through 10 show activities such as extravehicular activity (EVA) preparation, EVA activity to replace the wrist roll joint on the International Space Station's (ISS) robotic arm, logistics transfer operation, space suit check-out and loading of the Leonardo Multi-Purpose Logistics Module onto the Endeavour's cargo bay. Individual shots of Africa, Italy, Hispaniola, Mexico and the Strait of Gilbraltar are shown. For mission footage from flight days 1 to 7 and 11-14, see also, 'STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 1', 'STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 2' and 'STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 4'.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2002

CATS-based Air Traffic Controller Agents

This report describes intelligent agents that function as air traffic controllers. Each agent controls traffic in a single sector in real time; agents controlling traffic in adjoining sectors can coordinate to manage an arrival flow across a given meter fix. The purpose of this research is threefold. First, it seeks to study the design of agents for controlling complex systems. In particular, it investigates agent planning and reactive control functionality in a dynamic environment in which a variety perceptual and decision making skills play a central role. It examines how heuristic rules can be applied to model planning and decision making skills, rather than attempting to apply optimization methods. Thus, the research attempts to develop intelligent agents that provide an approximation of human air traffic controller behavior that, while not based on an explicit cognitive model, does produce task performance consistent with the way human air traffic controllers operate. Second, this research sought to extend previous research on using the Crew Activity Tracking System (CATS) as the basis for intelligent agents. The agents use a high-level model of air traffic controller activities to structure the control task. To execute an activity in the CATS model, according to the current task context, the agents reference a 'skill library' and 'control rules' that in turn execute the pattern recognition, planning, and decision-making required to perform the activity. Applying the skills enables the agents to modify their representation of the current control situation (i.e., the 'flick' or 'picture'). The updated representation supports the next activity in a cycle of action that, taken as a whole, simulates air traffic controller behavior. A third, practical motivation for this research is to use intelligent agents to support evaluation of new air traffic control (ATC) methods to support new Air Traffic Management (ATM) concepts. Current approaches that use large, human-in-the-loop simulations are unquestionably valuable for this purpose, but pose considerable logistical, fiscal, and experimental control problems. First, data analysis is extremely complicated, owing simply to the large number of participants and data sources in such simulations. In addition, experienced human air traffic controllers working adjacent sectors tend to flexibly adapt to the evolving control problem - potentially shifting to other strategies than those under investigation. In addition, their performance is tightly coupled to the control interface, which in the development phase may support some concepts and supporting strategies better than others. A simple shift in strategy by one controller can change the character of a particular traffic scenario dramatically, which makes experimental comparison of ATC performance under different traffic scenarios difficult. Training a given team of controllers on operations under a new ATM concept for a sufficient period of time could avert such difficulties, but instituting an adequate training program is expensive and logistically difficult.

Callantine, Todd J.↗

NASA NTRS2002

Payloads: SPACEHAB Research Double Module (RDM)

SPACEHAB Inc.'s Research Double Module (RDM) is making its first flight on STS-107. The RDM is a pressurized aluminum habitat that is carried in the space shuttle's cargo bay to expand working space aboard the shuttle. The RDM is connected to the shuttle middeck by a pressurized access tunnel. Boeing-Huntsville performed the RDM's systems integration for SPACEHAB and serves as the company's mission integration contractor. SPACEHAB Single Modules outfitted for research or logistics and Double Modules outfitted for logistics have flown on 15 space shuttle missions to date.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2003

Using System Mass (SM), Equivalent Mass (EM), Equivalent System Mass (ESM) or Life Cycle Mass (LCM) in Advanced Life Support (ALS) Reporting

The Advanced Life Support (ALS) has used a single number, Equivalent System Mass (ESM), for both reporting progress and technology selection. ESM is the launch mass required to provide a space system. ESM indicates launch cost. ESM alone is inadequate for technology selection, which should include other metrics such as Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and Life Cycle Cost (LCC) and also consider perfom.arxe 2nd risk. ESM has proven difficult to implement as a reporting metric, partly because it includes non-mass technology selection factors. Since it will not be used exclusively for technology selection, a new reporting metric can be made easier to compute and explain. Systems design trades-off performance, cost, and risk, but a risk weighted cost/benefit metric would be too complex to report. Since life support has fixed requirements, different systems usually have roughly equal performance. Risk is important since failure can harm the crew, but it is difficult to treat simply. Cost is not easy to estimate, but preliminary space system cost estimates are usually based on mass, which is better estimated than cost. Amass-based cost estimate, similar to ESM, would be a good single reporting metric. The paper defines and compares four mass-based cost estimates, Equivalent Mass (EM), Equivalent System Mass (ESM), Life Cycle Mass (LCM), and System Mass (SM). EM is traditional in life support and includes mass, volume, power, cooling and logistics. ESM is the specifically defined ALS metric, which adds crew time and possibly other cost factors to EM. LCM is a new metric, a mass-based estimate of LCC measured in mass units. SM includes only the factors of EM that are originally measured in mass, the hardware and logistics mass. All four mass-based metrics usually give similar comparisons. SM is by far the simplest to compute and easiest to explain.

Jones, Harry↗

NASA NTRS1998

Insight into mechanisms of reduced orthostatic performance after exposure to microgravity: comparison of ground-based and space flight data

Since the beginning of human spaceflight, the value of understanding mechanisms of physiological adaptation to microgravity became apparent to life scientists who were interested in maintining crew health and developing countermeasures agains adverse effects of the mission. However, several characteristics associated the the logistics of spaceflight presented significant limitations to the scientific study of human adaptation to microgravity. Because space missions are so infrequent and involve minimal numbers of crewmembers, meaninful statistical analysis of data are limited. Reproducibility of results from spaceflight experiments is difficult to assess since there are few repeated space missions involving the same crewmembers. Since the emphasis of space missions is placed on operations, experiments are compromised without adequate control over various factors (e.g., time, diet, physical activities, etc.) that can impact measured responses. With the mimimal opportunity to collect spaceflight data, there is a high risk of experiments that simultaneously interfere with other experiments by the increasing demand on the crewmembers to participate in mumerous experiments proposed by multiple investigators. The technology and ability to measure physiological functions necessary to test specific hypotheses can be severely limited by physical space and power constraints of the space enviroment. Finally, technical and logistical aspects of space missions such as launch delays, extended missions, and inflight operational emergencies can significantly compromise the timing and control of experiments. These limitations have stimulated scientists to develop ground-based analogs of microgravity in an effort to investigate the effects of spaceflight on physiological function in a controlled experimental setting. The purpose of this paper is to provide a selected comparison of data collected from ground-based experiments with those obtained from spaceflight in an effort to assess the adequacy of ground analogs of actual flight for the study of human physiological adaptation to microgravity. Specifically, results from ground and spaceflight will be used to provide insight into mechanisms underlying adaptations of blood pressure regulation and reduced orthostatic performance to the microgravity environment.

Non-NASA Center↗

NASA NTRS2001

The International Space Station human life sciences experiment implementation process

The selection, definition, and development phases of a Life Sciences flight research experiment has been consistent throughout the past decade. The implementation process, however, has changed significantly within the past two years. This change is driven primarily by the shift from highly integrated, dedicated research missions on platforms with well defined processes to self contained experiments with stand alone operations on platforms which are being concurrently designed. For experiments manifested on the International Space Station (ISS) and/or on short duration missions, the more modular, streamlined, and independent the individual experiment is, the more likely it is to be successfully implemented before the ISS assembly is completed. During the assembly phase of the ISS, science operations are lower in priority than the construction of the station. After the station has been completed, it is expected that more resources will be available to perform research. The complexity of implementing investigations increases with the logistics needed to perform the experiment. Examples of logistics issues include- hardware unique to the experiment; large up and down mass and volume needs; access to crew and hardware during the ascent or descent phases; maintenance of hardware and supplies with a limited shelf life,- baseline data collection schedules with lengthy sessions or sessions close to the launch or landing; onboard stowage availability, particularly cold stowage; and extensive training where highly proficient skills must be maintained. As the ISS processes become better defined, experiment implementation will meet new challenges due to distributed management, on-orbit resource sharing, and adjustments to crew availability pre- and post-increment. c 2001. Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Research↗

NASA NTRS2005

Sabatier Methanation Reactor for Space Exploration

The Sabatier Methanation Reactor technology is of vital importance to the success of the human and robotic exploration program. In order to achieve an affordable program, the logistics supply to support the mission must be minimized to the fullest extent possible. One area of potential reduction with high return on investment is the closure of life support loops, particularly oxygen and water. The Sabatier system accomplishes this by utilizing hydrogen and carbon dioxide, waste products from the life support system, to produce water and methane. The recovered water is then recycled back into the life support system to provide oxygen; while the methane can be used for propulsion, or can be broken down further to recover the hydrogen. This technology is applicable not only to transit phases of exploration, but surface habitats as well as in-situ propellant production. The Sabatier Reactor system has been developed for ground based demonstration experiments extensively over the past 30 years. Over the past three years, NASA has funded development of the Sabatier Carbon Dioxide Reduction Assembly (CRA) for use on the ISS. Currently this system is at TRL 5 and it is expected that the system will be flown on the ISS as a flight experiment, The purpose of the flight experiment is to integrate the Sabatier CRA into a synchronized system with the oxygen generation system and the carbon dioxide concentrator. The flight experiment will verify the integration of the different systems working together plus it will verify the capability of the system to operate, and effectively separate its products in a micro-gravity environment. Subsequent to design validation, the flight experiment can remain onboard the ISS providing valuable water to offset logistics re-supply requirements. Some of the challenges facing the development of the Sabatier system include handling vibration induced particulates, microgravity phase separation and containment of hazardous gases. Plans for adequately addressing these issues will be presented. The Sabatier carbon dioxide reduction process will greatly benefit any of the extended duration human exploration missions because of the tremendous savings of consumables realized. Any of these mission scenarios, be they transit or surface based, must consider closing the life support loops in order to make the mission achievable, let alone affordable. Carbon dioxide reduction technology will be necessary for future outpost habitats, and the technology needs to be proven viable in a space application. The Sabatier methanation reaction is also a desirable method for producing propellant from the Mars atmosphere. The common system could be designed to accept carbon dioxide from an indoor air revitalization loop concentrator, or from an outdoor atmosphere compressor. Carbon dioxide reduction validation is but one step in the spiral development of the in-situ propellant production system desired for future planetary exploration.

Murdoch, Karen↗

NASA NTRS2005

STS-114 Flight Day 11 Highlights

Flight Day 11 begins with the STS-114 crew of Space Shuttle Discovery (Commander Eileen Collins, Pilot James Kelly, Mission Specialists Soichi Noguchi, Stephen Robinson, Andrew Thomas, Wendy Lawrence, and Charles Camarda) awaking to "Anchors Away," to signify the undocking of the Raffaello Multipurpose Logistics Module (MPLM) from the International Space Station (ISS). Canadarm 2, the Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS), retrieves the Raffaello Multipurpose Logistics Module (MPLM) from the nadir port of the Unity node of the ISS and returns it to Discovery's payload bay. The Shuttle Remote Manipulator System (SRMS) hands the Orbiter Boom Sensor System (OBSS) to its counterpart, the SSRMS, for rebearthing in the payload bay as well. The rebearthing of the OBSS is shown in detail, including centerline and split-screen views. Collins sends a message to her husband, and talks with Representative Tom DeLay (R-TX). Earth views include the Amalfi coast of Italy. The ISS control room bids farewell to the STS-114 crew and the Expedition 11 crew (Commander Sergei Krikalev and NASA ISS Science Officer and Flight Engineer John Phillips) of the ISS.

Source record↗